this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
1613 points (99.5% liked)

Microblog Memes

7673 readers
2814 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

Too late we’re already an oligarch dictatorship

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Where the wealth tax is measured in calibre.

[–] Shialac@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

Always has been

[–] KMAMURI@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Taxes won't work now anyway. A redistribution of wealth is required.

[–] Underwaterbob@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Honestly I can never tell if these tweets are real or not

[–] Uranus_Hz@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Taxing the rich is the start, eating them is the finish.

[–] BreadOven@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Nah. Who wants to eat that filth? Let's compost them so they can actually do something useful.

[–] DarkSpectrum@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

One of the arguments by the rich is that excessive tax hampers progress. Now we can all see why that is a critical safeguard to have.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LoveSausage@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Tax the rich ? No Seize the means of production yes

[–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

To continue to industrially rape the planet? To the global south, indigeneous peoples, and all natural peoples, the results of capitalism or Marxist socialism looks exactly the same - we'll all be industrialized science addicts under capitalism or socialism, and all other non-European cultures must commit cultural suicide to become a "proletariat" worker of some factory. Your so-called "leftist revolution" isn't a revolution, it's merely a continuation of the European mindset that considers the natural world and natural peoples an acceptable sacrifice.

Would you like to know more? Check this out to gain some non-white eurocentric perspective because I got news for you - white supremasist eurocentric industrialization is not the dominant ideology. Did you think the peoples living in South American jungles for thousands of years need some 19th century European to teach them "complex" philosophy of sharing?

"But there is a peculiar behavior among most Caucasians. As soon as I become critical of Europe and its impact on other cultures, they become defensive. They begin to defend themselves. But I am not attacking them personally; I’m attacking Europe. In personalizing my observations on Europe they are personalizing European culture, identifying themselves with it. By defending themselves in this context, they are ultimately defending the death culture. This is a confusion which must be overcome, and it must be overcome in a hurry. None of us has energy to waste in such false struggles.

Caucasians have a more positive vision to offer humanity than European culture. I believe this. But in order to attain this vision it is necessary for Caucasians to step outside European culture — alongside the rest of humanity — to see Europe for what it is and what it does. "

[–] scintilla@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So uh what are we going to do with all the bodies since we're moving back to a pre industrial society.

I'm not a huge fan of in dusters luxation but the people are already alive and I'd prefer that we don't have mass death via starvation so that we can stop it.

[–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago

Mass death via starvation and thirst is a certainty thanks to climate change. Depleting water-tables and dumping toxic waste into landfills will happen under capitalism or socialism, we need a different way. American Indians have been screaming the solutions in Europeans face for centuries yet Europeans still choose the route of mass destruction.

People could be fed for free if rooftops and parking lots were turned into food gardens, or if we taught children about growing food from the earth with as much importance as we do with maths or languages, a las, that's the antithesis of European concept of "legitimate" thinking; what is written down has an importance that's denied the spoken. They have already demonstrated through their history that they cannot hear, cannot see; they can only read through the dead, dry leaves of a book.

[–] LoveSausage@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Never missed the laugh emoji react in the fediverse until now.

[–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Did I say something funny?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] index@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sound like the time to tax the rich was from 2016 to 2024. It's now time to do something else

[–] BreadOven@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I posted it in another reply, but what the heck, why not do it again?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYJ5ZViYhHQ

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

Harvard is missing from that list as well

[–] MoonlightFox@lemmy.world 45 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Everytime I hear arguments against wealth tax, gift tax, property tax or inheritance tax. It's the same argument, it's unfair towards the people who has worked all their life and want to leave their already taxed money to their family.

In Norway we have no inheritance tax and no tax on gifts. Most people have no taxes on homes either. We do have some wealth tax.

My main issue with the arguments against it is that its is lacking imagination. We make the rules, we can decide to make it fair. We can set a limit for when taxation occurs at a really high number. Just so that 98% of Norwegians get zero taxes on these things.

Zero taxes for inheritance up to 1 000 000 euros and then 75% on every euro above. Is possible.

Zero taxes on gifts up to 50 000 euros a year is possible.

No taxes on homes worth less than 1 000 000 is possible.

Bringing wealth with you when you permanently move out of the country is possible for values less than 5 000 000 euros for instance.

Then adjust for inflation every year (like we do with many of our welfare systems)

If we do this we can get rid of the wealth tax that the rich hate so much (because they are disadvantaged owners compared to owners of businesses in other countries)

No regular people will feel these taxes at all, and they make sure that the wealth is distributed over time. It's still possible to get rich, and remain rich. But your children can be rich but not insanely rich.

Exactly what the rates should be is up for debate, but this system is in my opinion a better one.

[–] Lemming6969@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Just mandate a luxury tax on all things normal people don't buy. You can have wealth, but you cannot have anything normal people cannot have without paying. Oh you want to acquire a whole ass business? You want to donate millions for political influence? You want a Ferrari? Want more land or a huge house? You pay demoralizing amounts of luxury tax.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

In the U.S. gift tax is exempt on the first $14 million you give. You just have to submit a tax form when you file your taxes. So someone can gift each of their 5 grandchildren a million dollar house, and then give them $1.8 million dollars in cash each before they die. And avoid any gift tax on any of that. Then get taxed an inheritance tax. There is no Federal inheritance tax. Which if you live in a state like Tennessee where I live, the inheritance tax is 0%. So you have now avoided paying any taxes passing down any amount of wealth you potentially have. If you are a billionaire and have an accountant that can't figure out how to bypass paying taxes you or they must be willfully choosing to do so in the U.S.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You can take this a step further and ask why we have this aggregation of wealth at all. Private wealth consolidation is a form of malinvestment resulting from a handful of individuals who are told they can effectively loot the economy unchecked.

Taxation "solves" the problem by clawing back some of that malinvestment. But if you recognize it as malinvestment from the outset, you can see arguments against having these private aggregators of wealth at all.

Instead of taxes, why not simply impose a maximum income? In baseball, you'd call it a salary cap.

[–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

if there was a maximum income people would still bitch and whine about those with mansions aquired through non monetary means.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Perhaps the next step is to improve our land use policy, such that one individual isn't afforded a mansion's worth of real estate.

[–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone -4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

a farm uses more land than most small mansions though, and plenty of individuals own farms.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Farm collectivization isn't a new idea

[–] chuymatt@startrek.website 3 points 1 month ago

Not as many as you would think, actually. And that is not the same thing that is being talked about.

[–] MoonlightFox@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Of course, but we are as a society so far away from that. It requires a bigger cultural shift than we are anywhere near. Even the thought of an inheritance tax is very unpopular.

Yes, even as a very social democratic country with a highly educated populace, we can be pretty stupid about taxes.

Also most really rich people have their wealth in assets and make their money as gains on those assets. So it does not really tax the most important people, except maybe some C-suites.

[–] Claidheamh@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You can index the values to a multiple of the median salary instead of a fixed number.

[–] MoonlightFox@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

This is in Norwegian, but most services is based on this number https://www.nav.no/grunnbelopet

Which currently is 124 028 NOK which is roughly 10 350 euros.

This number is referenced as G (Grunnbeløpet)

So for instance if I lose my job I can get up to 62.4% of a salary up to 6G. Which is the maximum.

Meaning the maximum payout is 744 168 (6G) * 0.624 = 464 360 NOK.

We have tons of calculations like this for all sorts of welfare services.

Every year in may this number is adjusted.

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Tax the rich? Its far too late for that

[–] BreadOven@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Not big enough. We have the technology....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYJ5ZViYhHQ

[–] dumples@midwest.social 2 points 1 month ago

Making the rich pay their fair share works great for my slogan: Make American Work for Everyone.

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

You're gonna love this. We (Australia) give a bunch of gas away (no royalties), barely tax the companies on their profits, and then most of it gets shipped overseas so it's expensive here.

We're a third-world country in disguise.

(Gas is dumb and should stay in the ground, but it's even more stupid for us not to get any revenue from it)

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/gas-exports-56-given-to-corporations-royalty-free/

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 month ago

I remember being in uni when George W got elected the first time. I recall my uni friends were saying there's no point taxing the rich because they'll always find another loop hole. I guess we should realize they'd never stop. They're never like, "hmm that's enough".

load more comments